<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2000 (7) TMI 142 - CEGAT, COURT NO. IV, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49931</link>
    <description>A fiscal exemption notification must be applied strictly on its plain wording, and its scope cannot be enlarged by substituting different expressions. On the stated facts, the exclusion in Notification No. 85/95-C.E. applied only to manufacture by polymerisation of organic polymers or chemical transformation of natural organic polymers; polymerisation of monomers was not covered. The assessee was therefore entitled to concessional duty, and the demand based on denial of the notification was unsustainable. The accompanying allegation of fraud or misdeclaration also failed because the classification disclosure correctly reflected the manufacturing process and no contrary finding was successfully challenged.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Aug 2010 14:40:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=88411" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (7) TMI 142 - CEGAT, COURT NO. IV, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49931</link>
      <description>A fiscal exemption notification must be applied strictly on its plain wording, and its scope cannot be enlarged by substituting different expressions. On the stated facts, the exclusion in Notification No. 85/95-C.E. applied only to manufacture by polymerisation of organic polymers or chemical transformation of natural organic polymers; polymerisation of monomers was not covered. The assessee was therefore entitled to concessional duty, and the demand based on denial of the notification was unsustainable. The accompanying allegation of fraud or misdeclaration also failed because the classification disclosure correctly reflected the manufacturing process and no contrary finding was successfully challenged.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49931</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>